WikiLeaks Shows Diplomats Lie to Themselves Before They Lie to Journalists

Today (12/2/10) the New York Times has another report based on the latest WikiLeaks cables. The focus is on U.S. policy toward the former Soviet republic of Georgia, and the upshot is that diplomats based there exercised little to no scrutiny of the claims made by Georgian government regarding South Ossetia and Russia. The conflict there led eventually to a brief war in 2008, which was often inaccurately portrayed in U.S. media as unprovoked Russian aggression against a U.S. ally. The Times reports:

The cables show that for several years, as Georgia entered an escalating contest with the Kremlin for the future of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, two breakaway enclaves out of Georgian control that received Russian support, Washington relied heavily on the Saakashvili government's accounts of its own behavior. In neighboring countries, American diplomats often maintained their professional distance, and privately detailed their misgivings of their host governments. In Georgia, diplomats appeared to set aside skepticism and embrace Georgian versions of important and disputed events.

By 2008, as the region slipped toward war, sources outside the Georgian government were played down or not included in important cables. Official Georgian versions of events were passed to Washington largely unchallenged.

The last cables before the eruption of the brief Russian-Georgian war showed an embassy relaying statements that would with time be proved wrong.

The conventional storyline at the time was that Georgia was attacked by South Ossetian forces, and thusforced to retaliate, which brought a Russian onslaught. The U.S. embassy's line–that the Times says "would with time be proved wrong"–was echoed in the media, as FAIR documented at the time. There was little skepticism shown toward Georgian claims, or its shelling of civilian areas of South Ossetia (which Russia pointed to as a justification for its military intervention).

The fact that U.S. diplomats and U.S. media were mostly in step is not a coincidence. It reminds me of that Karl Kraus quote: "How is the world ruled and led to war? Diplomats lie to journalists and believe these lies when they see them in print."

In this case, the WikiLeaks cables provide the basis for a useful corrective. And anyone who thinks theWikiLeaks cables mostly show that U.S. diplomats are doing good work should note this story as an example of just the opposite.

Activism Director and and Co-producer of CounterSpinPeter Hart is the activism director at FAIR. He writes for FAIR's magazine Extra! and is also a co-host and producer of FAIR's syndicated radio show CounterSpin. He is the author of The Oh Really? Factor: Unspinning Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly (Seven Stories Press, 2003). Hart has been interviewed by a number of media outlets, including NBC Nightly News, Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor, the Los Angeles Times, Newsday and the Associated Press. He has also appeared on Showtime and in the movie Outfoxed. Follow Peter on Twitter at @peterfhart.

Governments tell their representatives (diplomats) what they want to hear. It is a diplomate's job to justify its governments belief.
Once upon a time the media could print otherwise without massive retaliation.

Donr,
ÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€¦“It is a diplomate's job to justify its governments belief.ÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ Somewhat cynical, but sadly seems true. One would hope that the job would be to report back accurate observations from the field, but if ever the case, seemingly so no longer.
ÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€¦“Once upon a time the media could print otherwise without massive retaliation.ÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ And unless we return to such media policy (if it is even possible to do so; WikiLeaks may be the only hope, if people rally around it when shown the truth), there is little if any hope for progress in this world; we will be left solely with manipulation by the ruling class in their own self-interest.
It is ÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€¦“do or dieÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ time, people!

Because of alternative truth-telling organizations like FAIR, I always knew the truth about the above, in this case hours after the shooting started. It's always unnerving, though, when the Major Media start telling the Official story, and when the official story is debunked . . . silence.

The World bullied by that flagship of freedom, the USA is showing by it's treatment of Wikileaks and Assange, that when you can't, or won't put serious effort into keeping "the secrets" or finding the real leakers, shoot the messenger, (it's so much easier), and tell the free people of America it's a CRIME to read about all about the War Corruption and Geed that is the policy of their country. Isn't censoring what countries like China and those nasty Terrorist States that we fight perpetual wars with do? When a country adopts the policies and practices of it's enemies, then their enemies have won. http://en.rsf.org/wikileaks-hounded-04-12-2010,38958.html

he wasn't talking about suicide, his use of the term "poison pill" was metaphoricalÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ¦ according to the daily mail uk assange has "distributed to fellow hackers an encrypted "poison pill" of damaging secrets, thought to include details on BP and Guantanamo Bay."

now we wait and see what happensÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ¦.

as for the "two counts of sexual assault," they revolve around a swedish law called "sex by surprise," which involves intercourse without a condom.

in one case the condom broke and in the other there was consensual sex with a condom followed by sex withoutÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬Ãƒâ€šÂ¦..the two women met a few days after their individual encounters and compared notes, then went to the law

various prosecutors flip-flopped on bringing charges until after last week's leak…

Strange law…his bail has been refused.I wonder if there is more to it… or less.It is still under the heading of rape -which seems extreme in what little we understand of it.Remind me to check the bi-laws if I should meet a fair maiden from that country.